On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 03:31PM, Pierre Smits wrote: > When we're talking about this podling having gained 'committers many from > outside the company that donated the code', I wonder who we are talking > about. > > The reports to the IPMC show only numbers (3 in March 2015) and no names. > And for what it is worth, the June 2015 report shows a link ( > https://ignite.incubator.apache.org/community.html#list) that is pointing > nowhere. I assume that it should have been this page: > http://ignite.incubator.apache.org/community/resources.html#people. > > So we have (per today): > > - http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#ignite , aka ASF > list, > - http://incubator.apache.org/projects/ignite , aka Incubator list, > - http://ignite.incubator.apache.org/community/resources.html#people > (showing affiliation), aka podling list > > And there are discrepancies between the pages. E.g. > > - http://incubator.apache.org/projects/ignite shows Ryan Rawson as a > committer, but is not in > http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#ignite > > If we substract the mentors (4 according to > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/ignite, though we can argue whether > Henry Saputra should also be in there as he is listed in the March 2015 > report to the IPMC as one of the report signers) from any list, we see the > following changes: > > 1. Rayn Rawson (external, Apache Drill committer), > 1. Incubator list
Rayn evidently didn't have time/resources to participate in the incubation as initially proposed. That's why he's not in the authz template nor in the resolution draft. What's the point of this list again? > 2. Sergey Khisamov (external - Fitech Source), > 1. ASF list > 2. Incubator list, > 3. podling list > 3. Ilya Sterin (external - ChronoTrack), > 1. ASF list, > 2. Incubator list, > 3. podling list > 4. Evans Ye (external - TrendMicro), > 1. ASF list, > 2. Incubator list, > 3. podling list > 5. Ognen Duzlevski (external - Shoutlet), > 1. ASF list, > 2. Incubator list, > 3. podling list > 6. Gianfrano Murador (external - Engiweb Security) > 1. ASF list > 2. Incubator list > 3. podling list > > Adding 5 or 6 new committers isn't many. That is a start (regarding > diversity). It for sure doesn't scream independence, when the majority (of > committers, intended PMC members) is affiliated to one company. > > As for building the community of the podling, a mentor has the > responsibility to keep tabs on contributions to ensure that everything goes > according to the policies of the ASF, of the incubator and of the podling > and assess (together with the community) everything whether it is in line > with those policies. And report. > > As examples: > > - Statements (on podling pages re StackOverflow, or on external fora, > e.g. Nabble) that questions can be raised via those media, isn't in line > with how contributions to an ASF project (or podling) should be done. ASF > mailing lists are the primary source for non-JIRA (including code patches) > / non-wiki contributions. External sources are a nicety, but unreliable > when it comes to feeding back into the ASF mailing lists or identifying > active contributors or assessing potential additions to list of the > privileged few; > - Community pages should reflect how the on-boarding process is, > including pointing out/stressing that an iCLA is required (when > contributing anything above the level of question or comment); iCLA requirement is foundation wide, Pierre. Are you getting back to the point of by-laws again? Please don't > - Committed non-privileged contributors (at least those who have > registered an iCLA) should be listed in the pages of the podling, in order > to assess who (beyond committers) are enabled to make changes to e.g. wiki > pages, and who are eligible for commit privileges. Is it a requirement or just something you're making up? > And diversity is not only about the aspect of affiliation. It is also about > having (privileged) contributors of another kind other than just those who > contribute code changes (or register with JIRA). The pages of the podling > should reflect such. And mentors should point that out to the community of Again, is it some of your own wishes? If not, I'd apprecite a prooflink ;) Otherwise we can safely skip over the rest of it. > the podling. Otherwise the podling might imply (through its pages) that the > other kind of contributors aren't welcome, and/or that principles of the > ASF (e.g. 'All contributions are equal', 'Contributions buys privileges') > aren't applicable in the podling. Are you saying that these horrible things are practiced in the Ignite podling? Cause if you aren't saying that explicitely then I am completely lost in the purpose of this verbiage. > Apart from the above, the podling could and should do a bit more regarding > building an open, transparent project. Having done a cursory review of the > mailing list archives of the podling I have found no announcements of > organisational changes (e.g. adding the new committer/ppmc changes/mentor > changes). Perhaps, you need to complement your investigation with cursory review of the general@ list where the announcements were made. Cos --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
